The power to propel us to the stars

Jonathan Walkerin said:

Personally I would rather see more money used for exploring outer space than using trillions for useless wars in Iraq, Afganistan and development of F-35.

Click to expand...

One might also contemplate the value of the cosmetics industry, or the money spent on pets, or <insert personal bone of contention>.

Jonathan Walkerin said:

Personally I would rather see more money used for exploring outer space than using trillions for useless wars in Iraq, Afganistan and development of F-35.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Ophiolite said:

One might also contemplate the value of the cosmetics industry, or the money spent on pets, or <insert personal bone of contention>.

Click to expand...

The difference is, those examples are privately funded. Things like exploration of outer space usually involves public money (compulsory taxation).

ananda said:

The difference is, those examples are privately funded. Things like exploration of outer space usually involves public money (compulsory taxation).

Click to expand...

But both private and public money can be wasted, or at least spent in a less productive way. The use/abuse of the money is more relevant than the source in this context.

jayem said:

From what I was taught in undergrad physics, faster than light speed is impossible. Is that not correct?

Click to expand...

Actually I'm pretty sure that Einstein's theory only says it takes infinite energy to reach the speed of light. And I think the math works out fine with faster than light particles that have the same issue with getting to slower than the speed of light.

Some have speculated that there might be some process similar the unusual performance of Zener or Tunnel Diodes. E.g. tunneling past teh speed of light without ever reaching it. But such is still pure conjecture as far as I know.

chuckpeterson said:

We may get all these answers sooner than you think. I believe we have been visited by aliens and they are with us today. At some point in our near future they may reveal themselves and give us the tools to travel the stars ourselves or more likely they will stay hidden while whispering the answers we need in our ears without us even being aware they were doing it.

Click to expand...

It is probably way off topic but:
Why do you believe we have been visited by aliens?
How long do you think they have been here?
Are they masquerading as humans?
Why do you think they would reveal themselves?
What evidence do you have for any of the foregoing?

If anyone is genuinely interested this author has plenty of very informative videos about the issue

chuckpeterson said:

Planets like ours is rare, to say the least.

Click to expand...

First, than you for your reply.

I disagree. We are unable to state whether planets are abundant, with a substantial percentage of them containing planets like ours with intelligent life, or if the Earth is unique in the galaxy, or even the universe, or somewhere in between. You cannot realistically extrapolate from a sample size of one.

chuckpeterson said:

One thousand (1,000)+/- years from today we will be traveling in outer space; that is, if we do not blow ourselves up first. Now assuming we did travel the stars and came across a planet with life on it, you can bet your last dollar that in some form or way we would visit it.

Click to expand...

Certainly, but you propose that the aliens here are concealing themselves - else we could see them. That is one plausible alternative, but it is not supported, or excluded by the fact that we might visit other planets in the future.

chuckpeterson said:

Ok, you got me, I was relying on my gut feelings and a bit of intuition.

Click to expand...

I think gut feelings and a bit of intuition are useful for some practical matters, writing novels and embarrassing yourself in front of relatives at weddings. They are unlikely to be of much value in predicting the behaviour of aliens. Star Trek's budget has done a great disservice to imagining aliens, since almost all are essentially humanoid. Real aliens would be - wait for it - alien.

steve78 said:

Humanity needs to grow up and the only way that's going to happen is for humans to get out among the stars.

Plus we are trashing our planet and settling on other worlds like Mars maybe the only way to ensure survival of our species. If we don't do something about climate change then our species only has a few hundred years left before we face exctintion.

Click to expand...

We will trash other planets, enslave other entities for our labour, and/or pollute the neighbourhood with our "morality and ethics" by force if we can. Also, if we kill, lynch, and rape our own human race based on superficial differences, we will do the same to the other creatures from other planets with no problem.

You can't always outrun judgment, especially if you don't even understand why you are being judged. Our arrogance and ego will drive us to mess with the wrong neighbourhood, and the next thing we know earth will be invaded as a retaliation, and the same people who don't care about destroying another planet and people would never tell terrans.

The amount of folly in "exploration" is hardly realized until at least four generations later.

steve78 said:

Lol.

There are civilisations far more advanced than us out there, they may exploit or even decide to kill us if we ever meet them.

Click to expand...

Yes, where do you think we learn how to torture and kill our own so efficiently and fantastically?

But, they aren't "out there," and if they are (in another heaven/elevation), they are malevolent and we are likely already under judgment. What's more, the humans that are supposed to oversee national safety and prosperity know about it and aren't saying anything.

If you are a terran selling out terrans to malevolent entities for "flatteries"... well you aren't human.

jayem said:

From what I was taught in undergrad physics, faster than light speed is impossible. Is that not correct?

Click to expand...

FTL is possible, especially in the right media. Neutrinos travel faster than light all the time in heavy water - and give off a "photonic boom" of light called the Cherenkov Effect.

Tachyons are more than theoretical, but modern physics won't connect the theory and reality of these particles because (right now) they cant. Time is still considered linear and a real dimension in calculations, so tachyons will continue to come up as virtual particles.

For massive particles, this is an alleged impossibility for FTL travel, because of the incorrect assumptions and missing information academia is not ready to admit right now (if it is even known). This is despite the fact that neutrinos are MASSIVE (took them until the late 2000s to have their mass added to the Standard Model even though they were discovered to oscillate in flavour as early as 1998.)

Kaon said:

FTL is possible, especially in the right media. Neutrinos travel faster than light all the time in heavy water - and give off a "photonic boom" of light called the Cherenkov Effect.

Click to expand...

This is grossly misleading. The "speed limit" is the speed of light in a vacuum. Cherenkov radiation is the effect of a charged particle accelerated beyond the normal speed of light in a medium. This speed is always less than the speed of light in a vacuum.

Aside: I am not aware that neutrinos can generate such radiation. Appropriate citations would persuade me.

Ophiolite said:

This is grossly misleading. The "speed limit" is the speed of light in a vacuum. Cherenkov radiation is the effect of a charged particle accelerated beyond the normal speed of light in a medium. This speed is always less than the speed of light in a vacuum.

Aside: I am not aware that neutrinos can generate such radiation. Appropriate citations would persuade me.

Click to expand...

1) I stated FTL is media specific
2) I am not trying to convince you of something I already know. It is your right as a sovereign human to believe knowledge is owed to you, especially in debate - while at the same time scoffing and dismissing what you are unsure of.

This is that academic problem I talked about in our previous thread; you personify the attributes. Again, I completely understand it.

Kaon said:

1) I stated FTL is media specific
2) I am not trying to convince you of something I already know. It is your right as a sovereign human to believe knowledge is owed to you, especially in debate - while at the same time scoffing and dismissing what you are unsure of.

This is that academic problem I talked about in our previous thread; you personify the attributes. Again, I completely understand it.

Click to expand...

The clear implication of your post - because of the ambiguity of your writing - was that the speed of light in a vacuum can be exceeded. In the context of this thread "the speed of light" is "the speed of light in a vacuum". My point stands.

Ophiolite said:

The clear implication of your post - because of the ambiguity of your writing - was that the speed of light in a vacuum can be exceeded. In the context of this thread "the speed of light" is "the speed of light in a vacuum". My point stands.

Click to expand...

I am not going back and forth with you on these forums again - If anything to avoid being reported by you because your sense of clarity is off (no matter how much is explicit.)

Report, don't retort, right?

By the way, I explicitly mentioned FTL in a media, and that tachyons are virtual. You read what you read into it because you have a vendetta, or you are ignoring what is explicit.

Goodbye Ophiolite.

Kaon said:

I am not going back and forth with you on these forums again - If anything to avoid being reported by you because your sense of clarity is off (no matter how much is explicit.)

Report, don't retort, right?

By the way, I explicitly mentioned FTL in a media, and that tachyons are virtual. You read what you read into it because you have a vendetta, or you are ignoring what is explicit.

Goodbye Ophiolite.

Click to expand...

Feel free to place me on Ignore. I shall continue to correct your more egregious errors for the benefit of other members. I directed my comments to you only out of courtesy, to give you an opportunity to provide a coherent reply. Clearly that's not an option you favour. Thank you for your time.